After a flurry of recent Valley IPOs, it's time for a 75% tax and for people to drop the bling

I think I've found a cure for California's financial and cultural deficits. First, the symptoms. Financially, California is close to being bankrupt, it spends more than it makes and runs a huge $361bn debt, as illustrated by the online, live Debt Clock.

Unemployment is high; infrastructure is neglected; the pride of California, its UC Colleges, must raise tuition beyond the reach of the very people it was supposed to bring into higher education; California's state parks, another treasure, are neglected and being closed.

Fortunately, there's a solution – and it's right in our neighbourhood. We've seen the wealth created by a flurry of recent Valley IPOs, and we've watched the rise in share price of more established companies. From Apple to Zynga, Facebook, and LinkedIn, we have a fresh crop of McBillionaires ready to help.

So, here's what we're going to do.

First, let's all agree: $100K in monthly compensation is plenty. Beyond that, a 75% tax rate will help replenish the Golden State's coffers.

Second, millionaires and billionaires won't suffer much from a small yearly tax on their assets: 0.25% from $1.5m to $5m, half a penny on every asset dollar from $5m and up. Simplifying a bit, if you have $10m in assets you'll pay about $50K in asset taxes every year, $100m yields $500K, $1bn (think Facebook IPO) brings in $5m, and so on. A pittance for the great feeling of helping one's fellow Californians.

Then there's culture. Californians are perceived as a bunch of materialists obsessed with bling, cars, tans, IPOs, wineries, private jets, and various types of cosmetic augmentation and reduction. Outsiders deride our materialism, they call us nekulturny, they joke that the difference between yoghurt and California is that yoghurt has a living culture.

We can change all this by adding a simple clause to our asset tax code: works of art are non-taxable. This would result in an explosion of art purchases and patronage. Sculptures, paintings, installations would grace every home and office of substance; artists from all over the world would flock to California, a Villa Medici for the 21st century.

Finally, we have to take care of our abused high-tech workers. Think of the poor Facebook programmers who had to spend yet another night in front of their computers before the IPO. Management profiteers attempt to ennoble this abuse by calling it a hackathon and parading the participants before the media, but we're not buying it.

Let's put an end to these destructive and demoralising practices. Instead of a single 70-hour work week, we'll create two jobs, hire two employees, each working 35 hours per week. And to promote a serene atmosphere, let's agree that companies with 50 employees or more will have a "worker council" to oversee decisions such as staffing changes, compensation levels, group activities, layoffs, and the like.

Of course, as with any bold reform, some unintended, counter-productive side-effects may need to be considered.

Let's start with the asset tax scenario. You work at a successful Valley company, you make good money and decide to help younger entrepreneurs by recycling your gains into their creations. You invest $1m in a startup and get 20% of its shares. As expected, you have to pay the asset tax on that investment, every year. The company attracts new investors at a higher valuation. Great, your initial $1m is now worth, say, $10m … on paper. You will now pay 10 times as much asset tax as before, $50K every year. Unfortunately, after years of valiant struggle, the company shuts down. You lose your investment – and the cumulated asset tax. You would have been better off buying art instead. Less angst, more civic pride (although, admittedly, less investment and innovation, fewer jobs).

You've long figured out I'm not serious. A 75% tax bracket, an asset tax, a 35-hour work week and worker councils – such naive measures would create a massive flight of money and talent out of California and into neighbouring states that would be delighted to benefit from our bone-headed reforms.

And you've also figured out that the measures I've outlined, in a slightly oversimplified form, are or will shortly be in force in France. The asset tax is almost 30 years old and its current rate is likely to increase; the 75% income tax bracket is an election campaign promise and, believe it or not, the works-of-art exception is real.

This has resulted in a number of unfortunate countermeasures: High-tech execs pull up stakes and head to London or Brussels; European headquarters move out of Paris and Lyon or are created elsewhere. All because, to paraphrase François de Closets, French demagogues see no difference between Steve Jobs's fortune and traders' loot.

The 35-hour work week experiment failed to stanch French unemployment. The code that complicates the management of companies employing 50 or more people, as Frédéric noted two weeks ago, has resulted in an abnormally high number of companies with 49 workers or less.

From the outside, this is puzzling: Instead of attracting talent and capital, France creates a combination of fact and perception working against the very interests it purports to protect. In addition to the flight of taxable assets, this will accelerate the Brain Drain French officials often rail against. In the US – and particularly in California – we welcome French entrepreneurs, engineers, business people – and money. Do French politicians understand the real world, or will they continue to closet themselves in the French Exception's virtual reality?

—JLG@mondaynote.com

Timo Vuorensola's Nazi space romp is the most high-profile film to use crowdsourcing for both development and finances. Is this to blame for those lukewarm reviews?

If you've ever fancied yourself as a Hollywood screenwriter, producer or even star, the film section of crowdfunding site IndieGoGo might just be the place for you. Browse through the fledgling movie projects touting for cash in the past few months, and you might have come upon opportunities to pick up a writer's credit for $50 on the British post-apocalyptic drama Remnants of a Disaster, or an executive producer's credit on the Kiwi documentary God Is Incredible for $500. The director of comic book tale Super Day recently promised to shave his head if the film's campaign reached its $3,500 target, with donors permitted to scribble their names on his newly bald pate.

Amid the silliness, the site addresses a very real need. Movies cost an awful lot of money to make, and not everybody who wants to make movies has an awful lot of money. Some of these features may provide the opportunity for the next Kevin Smith or David Lynch to take their first step on the film-making ladder. And yet one cannot quite imagine either of the above offering to pass over creative duties on Clerks or Eraserhead for less than the cost of dinner for two at a half decent curry house, as at least one IndieGoGo project has promised recently.

A shift in terminology may even be in order: crowdfunding, via which film-makers reach out for help with the financial costs of a particular project, is becoming increasingly blurred with crowdsourcing, via which wannabe producers engage fans via the internet to become part of the creative process of putting together a new movie. Kept separate, each has its place. When one becomes contingent upon the other, creating a sort of "crowdeverything" hybrid, it gives the film projects in question an unsavoury air of mercantile desperation.

"There is a real dark side emerging," says British independent film producer and screenwriter Ant Neely. "I am seeing crowdfunding campaigns that offer 'a line in the film and an IMDb credit' for a big enough donation. The thought of casting someone because they can pay, as opposed to their abilities, is really very sad."

Neely and his wife Sloane U'Ren (a director) took a different approach to getting their science fiction-cum-period drama flick Dimensions: A Line, A Loop, A Tangle of Threads, on to the big screen – they simply sold their house. While he accepts that getting a movie financed is an incredibly difficult process, Neely doesn't believe the crowdeverything approach is the way forward.

"It's an interesting concept and arguably connects a film-maker directly with the audience," he says. "However, we're not comfortable with having movies made by committee. I'm not saying selling your home is any more of a sensible strategy though!"

If one film has a chance of escaping the crowdsourcing/funding ghetto, it's Iron Sky, a comedy romp about space Nazis from Finnish director Timo Vuorensola and a supporting online crew of thousands which is released on Wednesday in UK cinemas (more of which later). The €7.5m film will be shown in more than 70 countries this year and stands a good chance of making a profit for its legions of financial backers. Despite its origins, Vuorensola says his film eschewed the cash-for-credits approach.

"I have to say that I've been seeing this kind of thing a lot," he says. "They always start out cool and everybody is really excited for two weeks but then there's a mess of everybody doing something. If you want to crowdsource you have to be very dominant – I've always made it clear with Iron Sky that this is not a democracy, this is a dictatorship.

"With our film the idea was to use the community to develop ideas and issues that are problematic rather than get them working on the script. We needed lyrics for the national anthem of the moon Nazis, and I don't speak German, so it was something we put to the community. They knew what I was looking for, and they were able to let me know if something that someone had written was getting close."

Since this interview was conducted, it has emerged that the Iron Sky is to be released for just one day in the UK, a decision which producers have blamed on the distributor, Revolver. "The fact that they are releasing Iron Sky for just one day (in the middle of the week) shows a great disrespect for us, the film-makers, who have been slaving to make this film as cinematic – with big special effects, sounds and great action – as possible," reads a statement on the movie's website. "It's also a major middle finger to the fans, followers and investors who have been following the production for years and now suddenly have only a few hours to run to the theatre, and then enjoy their quickly rushed DVD and Blu-ray release."

Might the decision be linked to lukewarm early reviews for the film? And does the critical indifference which has greeted the project emanate from its crowdsourced origins? If so, the Iron Sky team are showing no sign of having got the message: their statement asks fans to email Revolver in protest at the short UK run. There's something to be admired, at the very least, in the producers' determination and audacious, barefaced belief in people power. Shouldn't critics take account of the film's meagre budget and reward its struggle in the face of adversity, rather than gloat over its failures?

Guardian film writer Andrew Pulver, who handed Iron Sky a two-star review at the Berlin film festival last year, says reviewers often do give low-budget fare an easier ride but reckons in the case of Iron Sky "the comedy just wasn't there".

He adds: "Cinema going back to (Robert Rodriguez's) El Mariachi has benefited from people reviewing the budget. Critics are supposed to be detached, but you tend to absorb the conditions under which the work is made. However in the case of Iron Sky the special effects were great, but after the first five minutes it really fell apart.

"The wider story is that 95% of filmmakers can't get the money they want, and crowdfunding is the latest thing. It was the same a few years back with microbudget and people like Terence Davies doing films for pennies: the first few who get on the bandwagon have done well but then you get the lemming-like rush. I find the thought of people surrendering control over their film – to treat it like it's a commodity – very bizarre. Giving someone a role as an extra is one thing, but writing is a very difficult art. It's like selling off articles in newspapers."

• Iron Sky is released in UK cinemas on Wednesday. Dimensions: A Line, A Loop, A Tangle of Threads was shown recently at the London film festival, and also at the London independent film festival, where it won best film.

The Guardian University guide and ranking for 2013 is out today. See what the data says and how it's changed since last year
• Get the 2012/2013 data
• 2011/2012 tables
• 2010/2011 tables
• More data journalism and data visualisations from the Guardian

The latest Guardian University Guide tables show that Cambridge University has retained it's position at the top spot, beating its rival Oxford as the UK's leading institution for the second year in a row.

Oxford and the London School of Economics have been placed second and third respectively, while St. Andrews has dipped to fourth place. Warwick, University College London, Durham, Lancaster, Bath and Exeter make up the top 10 rankings.

Loughborough and Imperial College have been knocked off the top ten, with Imperial making a marked descent from the 2009 rankings that placed it in sixth place. Individual rankings by subject are also covered in the university guide. Jeevan Vasagar writes:

Cambridge dominates across the board, coming top in 16 out of 47 subjects including medicine, veterinary science, biosciences, chemical engineering, maths and computer science. Oxford came top in seven subjects including economics, business studies and law. Oxford also comes top in chemistry and physics.

The tables are based on data for full-time undergraduates at UK universities. The full methodology is explained here.

Of the top climbers, Brunel has reached 44th position from 82nd last year, whilst Chester has climbed from 80th to 52nd. There have been some drops in rankings too. The lowest ranked in the overall list are Bolton, the University of Abertay, Dundee and London Met. Bolton plans to charge a range of fees up to a maximum of £8,400.

The tables were compiled by independent consultancy firm Intelligent Metrix. It's based originally on information collected by Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) and the National Student Survey, published by Higher Education Funding Council for England (Hefce).

There are 16 English universities appear in the top 20: Cambridge, Oxford, LSE, Warwick, UCL, Durham, Lancaster, Bath, Exeter, Loughborough, Surrey, Imperial College, Buckingham, York, Bristol and Leicester

Four new members - Durham, Exeter, Queen Mary and York - will join the Russell Group in August, so for the 2013 rankings we have updated the groups to reflect this.

What can you do with the data?

Data summary

Download the data

• DATA: download the full spreadsheet

More data

More data journalism and data visualisations from the Guardian

World government data

• Search the world's government data with our gateway

Development and aid data

• Search the world's global development data with our gateway

Can you do something with this data?

• Flickr Please post your visualisations and mash-ups on our Flickr group
• Contact us at data@guardian.co.uk

• Get the A-Z of data
• More at the Datastore directory
• Follow us on Twitter
• Like us on Facebook

Income from connecting smartphones to internet is up 22%, helping balance decline in voice call revenues

Vodafone has pinned its hopes for growth on digital, with income from connecting smartphones to the internet up 22%, helping balance voice call revenue declines and a tough trading environment in Europe.

"Data services offer the single biggest growth opportunity for the mobile industry since the launch of voice services over 25 years ago," said the company's chief executive, Vittorio Colao, as it announced full year results. "Our success in data is absolutely central to our strategy."

Revenues from data calls are now £6.2bn, around £1bn more than from text messages. This has been driven by the growing number of smartphone owners. Vodafone said penetration across its entire European base had risen to 27%, although adoption among customers with a contract is even higher, at 45%.

Vodafone reinforced its position as the largest dividend payer in the FTSE by raising its final payment to 6.47p a share, giving 13.52p for the year, its highest ever profit share. The company will pay out £6.8bn this year, compared to £4.5bn in 2011.

The increase was made possible by £2.9bn in cash received from America's largest mobile network, Verizon Wireless, in which Vodafone has a 45% stake. Verizon announced in July it would resume paying dividends.

Full year revenues rose 1.2% to £46.6bn in the year to 31 March, and profit before tax stayed flat at £9.5bn.

UK revenues rose to £5.4bn, with data up 15% to £872m. The UK has yet to auction the airspace needed for fourth generation superfast mobile broadband, but Vodafone is already running 4G networks in Germany and Portugal. The company spent £1.4bn last year acquiring 4G spectrum in Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal and Hungary.

Vodafone forecast operating profit would grow on an underlying basis, to between £11.1bn and £11.9bn, boosted by growth at Verizon Wireless. The US income now represents 42% of group adjusted operating profit.

Margins were squeezed because of the cost of switching customers on to smartphones, and price cuts in Spain. Colao warned Europe would remain "very difficult", saying: "Weak consumer demand from poor macroeconomic conditions, a harsh regulatory backdrop and ongoing competition create material barriers to growth."

Vodafone is pushing ahead with its £1.04bn offer for the fixed-line network operator Cable & Wireless Worldwide, and on Monday issued an offer document asking its target's shareholders to approve the deal by 18 June. Vodafone is seeking to use the operator's fibre network to boost its fixed-line system in the UK and relieve the strain of surging data traffic.

What's new on the app stores on Tuesday 22 May 2012

It had to happen eventually: a slow apps day, with just five new and notable apps to tell you about:

The Sandbox

There are plenty of Minecraft clones in the apps world, but The Sandbox does something different with the pixelly world-building genre. It's a "physics sandbox" that aims to get you creating your own universe, from mud and sand to plants, walls, metal and, er, light bulbs.
iPhone

101 Ideas: Flying with Kids

Going on a flight with easily-bored children? This app wants to help you not tear your hair out. It offers 101 "fun activities/in-flight games" that the developers claim "all children will enjoy, from toddlers to young teenagers". Which is a rather optimistic view of young teenagers, but worth a try.
iPhone

Calpol

Talking of ways to keep children quiet on flights... No, as good parents know, child medicines don't make kids drowsy nowadays. It's all about the pain relief. Now the makers of Calpol have an official app, including a dosage diary, local pharmacy and hospital info, and lullabies to play to poorly children.
iPhone

9mm HD

Gameloft has ported its grizzled-cop action title 9mm HD to RIM's BlackBerry PlayBook – the latest in an impressive flow of quality games for the tablet. Here, you're hunting down a gang leader before he hunts you down, with guns all over the shop.
BlackBerry PlayBook

Crumbly

This may be US-only at the moment, but it's an interesting spin on social location. The app aggregates check-ins and photos from friends on Facebook, Foursquare and Instagram with a view to showing you the most interesting places to visit in your current location. Or, as it styles itself, a "friend-powered compass".
iPhone